Student Told to Remove Tilak From Forehead To Enter Karnataka College

The Karnataka Government on Friday, February 18, was submitted to the Karnataka High Court which wore a hijab is not an important religious practice under Islam and that it does not allow it on campuses of educational institutions not to violate article 25 constitution, which guarantees the freedom to practice religion. Advocate General (AG) Prabhuling Navadgi began his submission for the state government in the presence of three reserves of Chief Justice Ruji Raja Awasthi, justice Krishna S Dixit and JM JM Khazi, who heard a collection of requests for a prohibition of headscarves on campus.

General Advocates said he would present an argument about three reasons – one, that the headscarf was not an important religious practice, the right to wear a headscarf could not be calculated under freedom of expression, and that the state government of February 5 mandated a uniform in college falling in line with law Law Education Karnataka.

The Advocate General also opposes the submission by the Petitioner of Muslim students that the State Government February 5 February the code mandate dressed in violating article 25 constitution. Article 25 The Constitution ensures the freedom of conscience and the free profession, practice and spread of religion to Indians. Citing the Supreme Court’s Assessment in the Sabarimala case and the Talaq Triple case, AG told the high court bench that the practice of wearing a headscarf “must pass the constitutional and individual dignity.” He also added that article 25 (2) allows the state to make laws to limit fundamental rights ‘for the benefit of public order, morality and health.’

AG told the High Court that the state government did not interfere with this problem and has allowed the College Development Committee (CDC) in Udupi PU College to decide uniforms. “The establishment of a conscious state is that we do not want to intervene in religious problems. We can say that the headscarf opposes secularism, but we have not done it …”

AG then quoted the resolution of the Udupi Universities Development Committee that talked about uniforms. “Uniform recipes were carried out in 2013-14. Uniform changes were in 2018. Since then, there is a uniform. There is no problem until 31 December 2021, when girls said they would enter the institution with only a headscarf,” said AG.

Ag said that when the government was informed about this problem, he decided to form a high-level committee to decide, and until then, had asked college to maintain the status quo. “But the protest continues, anxiety spread to other colleges,” said AG. In this context the government gave orders on February 5, 2022 uniform mandates.

Agung, however, told the High Court that the people who compiled government orders were “too enthusiastic” and that the command must be said to be better. The Karnataka government order states, “If the institution does not have a dress or uniform code, students must wear clothes that promote equality, unity and do not interfere with public order.” AG told the court that all state governments wanted to say that if there was no dress code, students had to dress politely. “The question to decline or prescribe the hijab does not appear. The state government has provided full autonomy to CDC and private management for private universities to decide,” AG added.

The state government said that in state government schools, students must wear a uniform prescribed by the government. In private schools, students will wear uniforms prescribed by management. In PU colleges, uniforms prescribed by the CDC must be worn.

“We don’t bother. We just say anything that decides the CDC. If the CDC doesn’t fix, then students must wear clothing codes for equality. We (the state) consciously have stayed away from this,” said AG. For this, the High Court asked, “So, if the CDC says the headscarf is permitted, you will not interf

About The Author

kari waker

See author's posts